The Supreme Court on Monday began hearing arguments challenging the constitutional validity of Article 35A of the Constitution. At the outset, it is important to note that the very question of if Article 35A is a part of the Constitution or not is in doubt. In any event, Article 35A protects the rights of permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir. Before this complex constitutional question can be addressed, it is important that certain context is supplied. [ . . . ] Jammu and Kashmir acceded to the Union in the year 1948 via an Instrument of Accession that made clear that it did not mean that the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir would accept any future Constitution of India. That's why on enactment of the Constitution, Article 370 providing various transition provisions was brought into force. This was also complicated by UN Security Council Resolution 47 that kept the state’s accession to India an open question subject to a plebiscite conducted by the UN. Though the resolution was non-binding, India had to wait for confirmation before the accession could be considered complete. Read the full article here: First Post